admonition, to suppose, with Olshausen, that heretics were spreading
false views of Christian freedom. 'Ap^at and egovoiat here connected
as in Luke xii. 11 ; the difference is that between magistracies and
powers, tteidapxelv must with De Wette be taken as grammatically
independent. "TirordaaeGdai. denotes their proper position with re-
gard to the powers, treidapxeiv the obligation to obedience resulting
therefrom. And it is willing obedience which the apostle requires :
be ready to every good work. These words still refer to the magis-
tracy. It is of course implied that the magistracy requires good
works, comp. Eom. xiii. 3 ; 1 Pet. ii. 14, seq. The idea that obedi-
ence is not to be rendered to what is evil is therefore not intended,
and does not belong to the context, comp. Matthies.
With ver. 2, the apostle passes to the subject of a right deport-
ment towards those who are not Christians generally, as the newly-
introduced object no man shews. "To speak evil of no man,
not to be quarrelsome, gentle, shewing all (possible) meekness to-
wards all men." The reference to those who are not Christians
generally, as is noticed also by De Wette, comes into view especially
in the last words. B^aa^rj^etv (properly ftXanretv rfjv $f\n'r\v nvog,
Wahl) according to Theodoret = pri6iva dyopeveiv Kaitwc;. Olshausen
refers it to the magistrates, against which are the words, no one.
The word is elsewhere used by the apostle, Kom. iii. 8, xiv. 16 ;
1 Cor. iv. 13, etc. "A^a^og occurs again only at 1 Tim. iii. 3. Em:e7f,
comp. on Phil. iv. 5, derived from eiicog, yielding, gentle, mild. On
irpaoTTig, 2 Cor. x. 1, as here in connexion with erneine'ia, 1 Cor. iv. 21,
as the opposite of severity = mansuetudo erga alios, comp. Winer
on Gal. v. 22 ; Harless on Eph. iv. 2 ; Tholuck. zur Bergpr.,
p. 82, seq. To all men these epistles give prominence not merely
to the universality of grace which the critics have held up, but also
to the right deportment of Christians towards all men, compare 1
Tim. ii. 1, seq. On ivdeiKw^evovg, comp. chap. ii. 10.
602 TITUS III. 3.
Yer. 3. Here follows, as confirming the propriety of the con-
duct here required towards those who are not Christians, a
reference to the fact that the Christian himself was formerly in the
same state of ungodliness as those who are not Christians are now,
and that he owes his deliverance from this state not to his own
merit. This reference gives us plainly to perceive, that the Cretan
Christians thought they found in their Christianity a reason for
looking down on those who were not Christians, and imagined that
they owed no debt of love to them. Indeed when Christianity be-
comes an external affair of mere knowledge, it is quite natural that
false conceit should go hand in hand with it, that the man who pos-
sesses the truth thereby stands on an elevation above others. " For
we also were once foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving diverse lusts
and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, hating one an-
other." Such a picture does the apostle hold up before them of
their former state. In their uncharitable contempt of their neigh-
bour, they seem to have quite forgotten that it is their own previous
character which they now find in those who are not Christians, and
on account of which they despise them. Chrysostom : " therefore
revile no one, he says, for such wast thou." In the successive clauses
of this verse we mark the progress from the inward source to the
outward expression, and its consequences. *llpev with emphasis
first : we were nore ; the antithesis is in ver. 4, ore dt'. We have
here the well-known Pauline antithesis of TTOTK and vvv } comp. Rom.
xi. 30 : Eph. ii. 2, 11, 13, v. 8 ; Col. i. 21 ; iii. 7, 8 ; the two angles
of the Pauline system. With this passage as a whole, compare
specially that cited from Ephesians. Kal ///-teZf = we too, as those
before mentioned still are. This nai shews plainly what is the
apostle's object in referring to their former condition, namely, to
shew trow little reason the Christian has to look down upon those
who have not yet attained to the possession of the blessings of sal-
vation. On the reference of jj/^tf there is difference of opinion.
The context decides that it is the difference between Christians and
not Christians, that is here spoken of. It is otherwise in Eph. ii. 3,
where the contrast is drawn between Jews and heathen. The
apostle then means himself, together with all who are now converted,
chiefly with reference to the Cretans, comp. i. 11. On the other
hand we learn from Eph. ii. 3, how unhesitatingly the apostle pre-
dicates what he here says in ver. 3 of the former condition of the
converted Jews, equally with that of the Gentile Christians. 'AvoTjrot
denotes the state of man as destitute of the true knowledge of God
= dyvoia, Eph. iv. 18, the result of his own fault, Rom. i. 18, seq.
'A7rei0fc7f, disobedient, in this general description of course not to be
explained of disobedience towards magistrates (so Heydenreich), but
towards God, comp. i 16, and Rom. xi. 30 ; Eph. ii. 2 ; Col. iii. 6.
TITUS III. 4-7. 603
So in like manner in Eph. iv. 18, along with dyvoia } the darkening
of the understanding, is mentioned the blindness of the heart. IIAa-
vtipevoi scil. dnb rf/f dtydeias where dkrjdeia denotes not abstract truth
merely, but the sum of what is morally good ; hence irXav^evoi is
not the same as dvorjroi, but a result of the two first predicates,
and = nA.dvr], Eph. iv. 14 ; Bom. i. 27. Com p. Harless on the
former passage. Similarly Eph. iv. 18, alienated from the life of
God, through the ignorance that is in them because of the blindness
of their heart. With special reference to the term, comp. Jas. v. 19,
20 ; Heb. v. 2. The words following describe the further conse-
quences of this state, serving divers lusts and pleasures, etc., comp.
Eph. ii. 3 ; on dovheveiv comp. chiefly Rom. vi. 6. The term de-
notes the power which sin acquires over men, by which it makes
them slaves. 'Rdovai De Wette remarks is not Pauline ; the word
is indeed accidentally not found in the other epistles, but every epistle
of the apostle contains words that are not Pauline in this sense.
Comp. Luke viii. 14 ; Jam. iv. 1, 3 ; 2 Pet. ii. 13. The word de-
notes the voluptates carnis. With as much reason might De Wette
have said that noiKikais is not Pauline, as it is found only in the
epistle to the Hebrews. Living in malice and envy. Kania is ex-
plained by its connexion with $Q6vu> it is as in Eph. iv. 31 (where
special manifestations of it are denoted in the preceding words), and
Col. iii. 8 = malignitas. Significat hoc verbo animi pravitatem,
quas humanitati et aequitati est opposita, et malignitas vulgo nun-
cupatur. Calvin cited by Harless on Eph. iv. 31. Aidyovreg =
" living in/' occurring again only at 1 Tim. ii. 2, connected with
Biov, The two last predicates, hateful, hating one another, are to be
taken together as forming an antithesis, and denoting the conse-
quences resulting from what is said immediately before ; they refer to
a reciprocal deportment, Eom. i. 29 ; Gal. v. 15. It would be un-
suitable to suppose here any reference to the relation between Jews
and Gentiles, of which nothing is said. So once (Trore).
Ver. 4-7. To this he now opposes a ore 6e, not, however, with
the view of giving a description of the new state introduced by the
ore, in contrast with the former, but to shew in the connexion how
little reason the Cretans have to be proud of themselves. It is
through the kindness and love of God that they have been saved,
not in consequence of their own merit, but solely in virtue of his
compassion, through the work of salvation and the efficacy of bap-
tism. When the connexion is rightly considered, the objections
which have been brought also against this part of the epistle fall of
themselves to the ground. It then appears quite evident, for what
reason the kindness and love of the Saviour- God are mentioned so
emphatically in connexion with the work of salvation, without our
needing to have recourse to Marcion's God of love in order to ac-
604 TITUS III. 4.
count for it. Further, the words, not by ivorks of righteousness
which we have done, are then explained, and the only thing inex-
plicable, is that such an expositor as De Wette should stumble at
them. Finally, it is then evident why precisely the saving efficacy
of baptism is brought prominently forward. When, however, says
the apostle, the kindness and philanthropy of our Saviour God ap-
peared, he saved us not on account of works in righteousness which
we had done, but in virtue of his mercy through the bath of regene-
ration and renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he has shed on us
abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour, that being justified
by his grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eter-
nal life.
Ver. 4. As is clear from the connexion given above, Heyden-
reich incorrectly traces the scope of the passage when he says :
Now however the grace of God manifested towards us in Christ, lays
us under obligation to cultivate other and worthier dispositions.
As if \ve were transferred back to chap. ii. 11. The apostle's object
is merely to shew, how little the Christian is at liberty to exalt him-
self above him who is not a Christian ; inasmuch as he was form-
erly himself nothing better, and has become better not through any
merit of his own. With respect to the construction, when the con-
nexion is rightly apprehended, as describing not the introduction of
salvation in general, but the change that has passed upon individu-
als, there can be no question that the answering clause already be-
gins with the words not by ivorks, etc. It is therefore superfluous
to recur, with Matthies, to the grounds of the Pauline system of
dctrine. But ivhen of God, the anterior clause denotes only what
is necessarily pre-supposed in he saved us. The salvation must
first exist, before individuals can enter on the possession of it. That
kindness and love answer here to the idea more commonly expressed
in the word grace, is quite correct. Substantially the same thing is
expressed here as at ii. 11 by the grace of God which bringeth sal-
vation. It is however easy to see why the apostle expresses himself
differently here. His object is to shew how little the Christian can
speak of his own merit, in comparing himself with those who are
not Christians ; hence in the very outset, and still more pointedly
in what immediately follows, the prominence which is given to the
goodness and benevolence of God, in which alone lies the ground of
the appearance of salvation in general, as in regard to the individuals
who partake of it, it lies in the saving mercy of God. De Wette
himself has shewn that the use of the expression xprjaroTW is alto-
gether Pauline, by referring to Rom. xi. 22, Eph. ii. 7, where the
word occurs in the same connexion. On the relation of xprja-oT^ to
%dpig the passage last cited throws light, inasmuch as ^f^arorjjg is
there adduced as proof of the ^opt?. Comp. Harless on the passage.
TITUS III. 5. 605
The same applies to QtXavOpunia. The Divine xdpis manifests itself
in the form of kindness and philanthropy. These expressions are
all the more suitable here, as in ver. 3 the natural condition is de-
scribed in its entire wretchedness. The expression Qikavdpuma
(Acts xxviii. 2) occurs nowhere else. As a parallel to the thing ex-
pressed by the word, De Wette adduces John iii. 16 ; he might
have adduced from the epistles of the apostle those passages which
we have already cited, if such had been necessary. On the expres-
sion KTT<pdvr) all that is necessary has been said at ii. 11 ; on auTrjpos
Oeov at i. 3. Baur would recognize in the tracing back of the atone-
ment to the kindness and benevolence of God, an accordance with
the Marcionitic phraseology, against which Bottger, a. a. Q. p. 105,
refers to Kom. viii. 31 39 ; v. 8, seq. ; ii. 4, and the passages
already quoted above.
Ver. 5 he has saved us not in consequence of (= on ac-
count of) " works wrought by us in righteousness," as De Wette
renders. On efcomp. Winer's G-r., 47, under KK. p. 329. The words
TWV epywv r&v KV d. are placed in their true light by De Wette's
translation just quoted, and his explanation : " not, as Matthies
thinks, of works appearing in the form of the ducaioavvr], for ev dm.
like KV 0eo>, John iii. 21, denotes the state of mind and feeling in
which these works are done." Cornp. on Phil. i. 11, fruits of right-
eousness; Winer's Gr., 48, KV. We find the same exclusion of man's
works of righteousness, in Eph. ii. 8, 9, by grace ye are saved . . .
not of works. De Wette thinks the sentiment unsuitable in both
passages, as it is the sinful state of those who were formerly heathen,
that is spoken of before. This is quite true, in so far as, from the
foregoing description, their not having been saved on account of
their own works was self-evident. But the apostle nevertheless ex-
pressly declares it, and he must have had a special reason for doing
so. This reason is plain ; he aims at strongly representing the
saving grace as free and undeserved, by expressing it in a neg-
ative (OVK, etc.) as well as in a positive form. The emphasis in
the sentiment of this passage rests indeed entirely on the not. It is
a very abstract logic that will stumble at this. Harless, on Eph. ii.
9, does not seem to have even imagined that any such objection could
be raised. We learn from the passages adduced by him, how truly
Pauline this antithesis is, Rom. iii. 20, iv. 2 ; Gal. ii. 16, iii. 2 ; Phil,
iii. 9. How much importance the apostle attaches to this " unsuit-
able" exclusion of man's works, appears from the words immediately
following, &v Knoi'/]aa.ftv r^elc; (quas nos fecissemus). We, as opposed
to, his mercy. The true cause of our salvation already indicated
negatively, and thus expressed with all emphasis, is given in the
words nar 1 avrov tAeov. On Kara, Winer's Gr., 49, d., p. 358. By virtue
of his mercy he has saved us, comp. 1 Pet. i. 3. On tvleof, Rom. ix.
606 TITUS III. 5.
23, xi. 31 ; Eph. ii. 4 ; Gal. vi. 16. It denotes in these passages
the ground of salvation. Here it denotes the means of salvation in
the case of individuals, after the kindness and philanthropy of God
has already been manifested in the objective facts of the gospel.
Evidently, therefore, the apostle cannot here be speaking of those
facts connected with the gospel, upon which hangs the possibility
of salvation, but only of the means by which God brings the in-
dividual into a state of salvation into the possession of those
redemption blessings which are already objectively present. And
here again the train of thought which is exhibiting only the part
which God performs in our salvation, does not admit the mention
of what is required on the part of man, as the subjective instru-
ment or condition of his entrance on salvation. Hence it is not
said, did rrjg marew; (Eph. ii. 8, comp. with Phil. iii. 9, K-H ry ruVrw,
and Harless on the former passage), for the apostle's aim here is not
to describe the new state of the man, but to point to the act and
saving agency of God in regard to the individual by which the new
state is brought about, and which shews more than anything else,
that this new state does not rest on man's merit or on his doing.
And what act of God's saving mercy towards the individual could
this be, other than baptism, through which the man is planted into
the fellowship of the Three One God, which is a putting off of the
body of the flesh (aoyia rfc aap/tdf, Col. ii. 11), and a putting on of
Christ (Xpiarbv evedvaaode, Gal. iii. 27), in short which, as it is de-
scribed in our passage, is a bath of regeneration ? It is this which
transfers the man from the state described in ver. 3, to the new life
of the Spirit ; it is the sure foundation upon which, in regard to the
individual, rests all farther increase in the life of the Spirit. Thus
we understand why baptism is here referred to as the means of sal-
vation. And this the apostle designates by Aovrpov Tra/Uyyeveotaf,
bath of regeneration: for we scarcely need refute the view, which
regards this as merely a metaphorical expression, a view also applied
to Eph. v. 26. Comp., moreover, what Harless says against it on
the passage adduced.
With regard to the passage before us, Heydenreich has already
said all that is necessary, p. 329, seq., when in opposition to all those
views, which hold Aov-pov to be a metaphorical description of the
change that has taken place, or to denote the Divine Spirit himself,
and the purifying, renewing, and exalting power of this Spirit, or
the abundant communication of the Spirit, or the Christian doc-
trine he urges with truth, that the regeneration and renewal which
the Spirit of God effects are sufficiently denoted by the words TraAtyy.
and dvaK., that the Spirit of God himself, and his gracious influence,
are never denoted by Aourpov, and that the agent in our renewal
is by -vevfj-a ayiov plainly distinguished from his agency
TITTJS III. 5. 607
and dvarc.), and the instrument he employs, Xovrpov. He farther
observes with perfect justice, that Xovrpov is anything hut a suitable
emblem of the abundant communication of the Divine gifts of
grace, or the sanctifying influence of the Divine Spirit ; a bath can
only be the symbol of cleansing, not of the abundant overflowing of
certain blessings ; and if reference be made to t'%ee, ver. 6, as ex-
plaining the Xovrpov (Teller), it must still be said, that a bath and
the outpouring of a rich overflowing fullness of strength and bless-
ing, are plainly quite different ideas. Finally, to represent the doc-
trine of Christ as Acwrpov, were a metaphor quite foreign to the New
Testament. Enough has been said for the refutation of these
interpretations, although in a grammatical point of view much more
might be said. But it must create surprise, to find Matthies still
saying : if by hovrpov we understand not so much a mere allusion
to the idea of baptism, as rather the express designation of the out-
ward act of baptism ( ?), then must the whole passage appear indis-
tinct and self-contradictory, from the confusion of the material
element with the spiritual principle of life, while yet Paul himself
repeatedly places the true significance of baptism in the symbolical
reference to Christ, and the evangelical renewal of the life (Rom. vi.
3, seq.) But how then will Matthies remove this indistinct commin-
gling of the material element and the spiritual principle of life, see-
ing that it is plainly said of baptism, Iva avrrjv dyidoq icadapiaas r<3
Aovrpw rov vdarog KV prjuaTt ? Is Xovrpov TOV vdarog here also a
" hath of the Spirit ?" Comp. Harless' excellent interpretation of
this passage. And if the symbolical reference will suffice for such
passages as Eom. vi. 4 ; Gal. iii. 27 ; Col. ii. 12, will it also suffice
for 1 Pet. iii. 21, where of the /3a7m<7jua it is said : ou&i . . owEidij-
oeug dyatfyfc K-nep^Tr^a el$ Oeov (comp. Hoffman, Weiss, und Erfullung,
II. p. 234), and John iii. 3-5, except a man be born of water and
the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God ? Rather do
not these passages place before us that very " commingling of the
material element with the spiritual, in which the Christian church
has in conformity with the Scripture, from the very beginning re-
cognized the essence of the " outward act of baptism," and accord-
ing to which the Christian doctrine has stamped it ? Matthies
says, there can be no doubt that by Xovrpov is to be understood the
bath in the sense of moral cleansing, as in regeneration and renewal
the washing away of, or the freeing from all untruth and sin, forms
the most essential element. To this we would simply say, that the
expression Tra/Uyyevsma, as also avanaivuaic;, has so little to do with
the figure of washing away, that it appears quite unintelligible how
the apostle should have fallen upon such a comparison, if he had not
in his mind a certain hovrpnv, namely, baptism, the substantial
effect of which is this TraXiyyeveoia. And how inconsistent is it with
608 TITUS III. 5.
the clear context (the aim of which is to shew how little reason the
Christian has to boast on comparing himself with those who are not
Christians, seeing that it is the mercy of God alone that hath saved
him) to speak, as Matthies goes on to do, of 'the free self-determin-
ation with which every individual has to subject himself to this
" purifying and quickening bath of the Spirit," whilst along with
this he yet sees a reference to baptism, on the ground that the idea
of baptism points to this, namely, that the life of the baptized per-
son must bring to completion in itself the moral purifying process
of expiation ! and sanctification. Thus far the words of the pas-
sage before us are explained as certainly referring to baptism !
Having stated my view of the passage in general, it remains only
now to confirm it by a reference to particulars. The apostle de-
notes the instrument of the salvation which is founded on the
mercy of God by kovrpbv naXiyyeveaiag K<U dvaKaivuae^ dyiov TTVEV-
ftaro^. What grounds we have for taking Aovrpdv in its literal
and not in its metaphorical sense, are shewn by the unsuitableness
of the metaphor, and also by passages such as Eph. v. 20, roi
Aovrpw TOV vdarog ; Heb. X. 22, ^e^ovfievoi TO atipa vfian Kadapti ; John
iii. 5, tf vdarof not m>tv^aro^ ; 1 John V. 6, <V vdaroc; nal afyzarof,
comp. with ver. 8 ; and finally, from passages such as 1 Pet. iii. 21,
where baptism is likewise described as the means of salvation, and
indeed in general from everything that we know on the subject of
baptism from Scripture, comp. Hofmann, a. a. Q., II., pp. 233-236.
How indefinite and ambiguous is the relation expressed by the geni-
tive, is shewn by Winer's Gr., 30, p. 168, seq. Thus the similar
expression Pdrrnvfia fteravoiag can, from the nature of the thing it-
self, be explained only of baptism which binds to repentance, and,
taken by itself, the expression in the passage before us admits of a
similar meaning. The relation of the genitive can be determined
only from the context, and from a comparison with what we learn
elsewhere concerning this Xov-pov. Hahiyyeveoia occurs again only
at Matth. xix. 28, and there it denotes the restoration of all things.
Here, on the other hand, it is substantially the same as the being
born from above, or of the Spirit, or of God, John iii. 3, seq. To
this belongs also the -nakiv w&'vw, Gal. iv. 19, and all those passages
which speak of adoption, Gal. iv. 6, etc. The old man dies, the body
of the flesh is put off, Col. ii. 11, and Christ is put on instead, Gal. iii.
27. "He who offers himself for baptism, desires a relation to God in
which Christ is, what formerly was the body of the flesh, and the
spirit of Christ, what hitherto has been the sin dwelling in the
flesh. He purposes no longer to wear the garment of that na-
ture which consists in sinful inclination to what is evil, but to
put on Christ, the new man." Hofmann, a. a. Q. If this is the
idea implied in nakiyyeveoia which is connected with this Xovrp6v t
TITUS III. 5. 609
there can be no doubt as to the reference in the words KOI dvatc.,
etc. They cannot denote a second means of salvation along with
the first, a view also grammatically unsupported (the repetition
of dtd is not warranted by critical authority), nor a second effect
of the kovrpov different from the first (we suppose for the present
that this is the relation implied in the genitive); the words can
only be an explanation of the expression immediately preceding.
For what else can be meant by dvanaivwau; nv. dy. = the renewal
proceeding from the Spirit of God, answering to the putting on
the new man, Eph. iv. 24 = putting on Christ, Gal. iii. 27 what
else can be meant by this expression, than the new birth of the
man denoted by the word immediately preceding ? Both expres-
sions then are equally designations of the hovrpov, but the latter
more specially defines the former. So also Olshausen : dvaitaivu-
01$ is the process, when the new man is created ; and this takes
place in the Trakiyyeveoia. 'Avaicaivuatg is used by the apostle
only again at Bom. xii. 2, as also dvaKaivou and dvaaaivifa are used
only by him, bat by him frequently. On the thing denoted by the
word, comp. Eph. iv. 23 ; Col. iii. 10 ; Gal. vi. 15 ; 2 Cor. v. 17. It
is evident that nvev^aro^ djiov denotes the causa efficiens. We have
supposed, in the course of this investigation, that the relation of the